Fritz the Cat

I'm not particularly a cartoon-fan. I saw " Fritz the cat" in an obscure movie theatre in Ghent (Belgium)in the early seventies. There were about 5 people in the theatre and 2 left after half an hour.

I enjoyed the story: it's about a young guy who discovers the "real" world with all his odd aspects, as the situation was in the late sixties.

The music in this film is super: I discovered the great Charles Earland (Black talk), Duke's Theme from Ray Shanklin, Mamblues (Cal Tjader), Bertha's theme (Ray Shanklin) and even Billy Holiday 's wonderful "yesterdays".

Those who believe there are racist tendencies in the movie don't dig anything about "Jewish" humour.

After having watched this movie, I left the cinema with the conviction:" Hey, in fact I am Fritz the cat ", and believe me, at that time, I was!

That is how the 1960s were described by the narrator in the beginning of this film. Fritz the Cat is a famous movie for a number of reasons, most stemming from it being the first feature-length adult cartoon and having an "X" rating. There were controversies surrounding its creation with director Ralph Bakshi and character creator Robert Crumb. The film is like nothing I have ever seen before. It has a unique animation process that makes everything reek seediness, despair, and cry for social change. Bakshi wrote the script which really is nothing more than the knife that cuts through all the 60's BS - from existentialism to the drug culture to the love generation to African-American perspectives to militancy. Nothing is spared as the counterculture is laid bared and examined through the eyes, ears, fears, and desires of Fritz the Cat. Along the way, Fritz experiments with just about anything - including lots of sex, drugs, and sex. While the film definitely is quite vulgar in many ways with some of the most odious characterizations of otherwise cute and cuddly animals and depicting lots of strong sexual situations(though in no way deserving the "X" by today's standards), Fritz the Cat is also an intelligent look at one character's drive to find himself and meaning in his life - perhaps a symbol for the whole decade the film is examining. The end result is nothing conclusive - also perhaps a symbol. Bakshi's script is in some ways profound and thought-provoking and in some ways infantile and vile - his obvious dislike of police just one example. But what had my attention more than anything else was the animation - particularly in exterior shots not containing characters. There is one scene where the slums of Harlem are integral to the story. Bakshi uses his camera to zoom in on quite an impressive animated background shot of a field lost amongst the slums of Harlem. It is the very essence of seedy existence in an uncaring world. There are many other shots too that have that same power, but let's not forget that even with the intelligent at times script and the animation, much of Fritz the Cat is used solely to arouse - either arouse some primal feelings or arouse offense. A landmark film at any rate whether for good or for bad.

From what I had heard of this film and the other user comments posted, I was expecting a simple little shock cartoon. What I got was good kick in the pants. And I mean that in a good way. "Fritz the Cat" in many ways exposes the 1960's more than the live action films of its own decade.

The movie starts with 3 construction workers talking on top of an unfinished building. The dialogue is very spontaneous and almost seems ad-libbed. These types of conversations are sprinkled throughout the 80 minute film.

It then transitions to Fritz the cat, a college student who, like many of that era I'm sure, is not sure what it's all for. He decides to "do something real" and ventures into Harlem. From here he meets a wide assortment of people, incites a riot, and has sex with many a woman. It may not always have a point, but the movie has one fun segment after another with little breathing room. Sometimes unnecessarily shocking, sometimes surprisingly inspired, but always quick on its feet.

So please give it a chance. It's a lot more than the notorious cartoon porn it's been labeled as. It's a fun romp through the deprived New York of the 60's, except this time with cartoon characters! What's not to like?

7/10

Anyone who didn't like Fritz the Cat is not looking at the film in the right way. A lot of the reviews I've read basically said that it is nothing more than a bad film that strives only on shock value to get an audience. I also read that it doesn't have much of a storyline and only revolves around sex and drugs......so what else did you expect a movie about the slackers of the 60s to have? Did the stoners of that decade NOT behave the way Fritz does in the movie? In order to understand the point of the movie you have to put yourself into Fritz's shoes and let him guide you through his life as a college drop-out trying to find his purpose (Existentialism for those who are not familiar with philosophy) in life and still have a good time. Of course his journey leads you to animal orgies and a crow that hides pot in awkward places, but that is the beauty of this movie--it's about freedom! I also do not believe it is outdated because Fritz's trippy surroundings and his pseudo-intellectual thoughts were enough to make me melt! It's all about the mood. The animation and music put the viewer in a hypnotic state where nothing else matters except pleasure and happiness. If you can't identify with Fritz then you have lost the feel of what it's like being young.

And just for some peoples' info. the movie is not X-rated because it has explicit sex scenes (any viewer of pornography, also X-rated in some form, knows that we have seen much more of the human body then is depicted in this film), it is X-rated because there are CARTOON ANIMALS HAVING SEX. Anyone who would give this film an R-rating because there are no close-ups should not plan on an MPAA career in the near future

The bad thing about the past is that it is designed to fool you.

The idea is supposed to be that the past stays fixed, as a sort of "truth." And we change. But viewed from ourselves, often the illusion or even the truth is the reverse. We know who we are. We think we recall who we were -- which we envision is some state on the way to who we are. Something relatively static, which means that the past changes. Radically.

Or at least artifacts from the past change, artifacts like movies. All this is complicated by the fact that movies are a key tool we use to define ourselves.

So it is a strange trip indeed to encounter something that DID define us, that we allowed to tell us who we were. And to find it so vacuous, so superficial it shocks.

If you were not a hippie in that era you may need to know the great schisms at work. (I mean the era depicted here -- 1969 -- not the actual date of the movie.)

You had the east coast hippies who were the sons and daughters of the beat generation. We were interested in ideas and art, and life as both. You had the "political" hippies, who were motivated by unhappiness and determined to change what they didn't like in the name of the values of more "genuine" hippies.

And then you had the west coast hippies. These were the ones captured by drugs, "free" sex and dropping out. To differentiate themselves, they adopted the icons of death.

At the time, there was as much confusion among these three as between any one of them and the Nixonites. (This was in the days of the "moral majority" and before the rise of the religious right which evolved from it.)

And where there is is identity confusion, art rushes in. The Beatles of course, and central. Eastern "religions."

And R Crumb.

Crumb was a magnet, pulling many from the other camps into the west coast sphere. He made it seem less radical than it was -- more about cruising (which he called "truckin") and simply enjoying the cornucopia of round women God places there only for pleasure.

We bought it, all of us. It was a sort of commercial identity, sort of like what you see today that surrounds Valentine's day. A vague notion of self and others and satisfied living.

Now, we look at this and it seems the past has moved away from us, away from truth. Was this ever good, or did we only pretend it so because we were so hungry to be defined?

I recently saw a Mickey Rooney movie where he introduces himself to Judy Garland as "white, free and available." I recoiled. I rejected that past. I had nearly the same feeling when watching this, even though it is/was my past.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.